Man on second base, ball is hit to the third baseman. Runner from second takes off towards 3rd base. Realizes that he is going to be tagged out and goes out of the baseline. Third baseman reaches back to tag him but misses by several feet as the runner went around him. Third baseman throws to first late and the runner going to first is safe.

In our opinion, this was a clear running out of the baseline violation. Our 3rd baseman had the ball in the base path and the runner simply ran a circle around him. He left the baseline by nearly 12 feet which was the only reason the tag was unable to be applied.

The umpire explained that it wasn't a violation because the fielder didn't make enough of an effort to chase him down. Once he missed with the tag and threw to first, the runner going to 3rd was safe. If he hadn't thrown to first, then he would have called him out.

Was this correctly called? I've looked through rulebooks and never found anything like it.

Man on second base, ball is hit to the third baseman. Runner from second takes off towards 3rd base. Realizes that he is going to be tagged out and goes out of the baseline. Third baseman reaches back to tag him but misses by several feet as the runner went around him. Third baseman throws to first late and the runner going to first is safe.

In our opinion, this was a clear running out of the baseline violation. Our 3rd baseman had the ball in the base path and the runner simply ran a circle around him. He left the baseline by nearly 12 feet which was the only reason the tag was unable to be applied.

The umpire explained that it wasn't a violation because the fielder didn't make enough of an effort to chase him down. Once he missed with the tag and threw to first, the runner going to 3rd was safe. If he hadn't thrown to first, then he would have called him out.

Was this correctly called? I've looked through rulebooks and never found anything like it.

Runner heading to third should've been called out. Runner at first is safe.

1) runners on first and second with no outs (infield fly rule in effect). Pop up hit between shortstop, third baseman, and pitcher. Short and third charge, pitcher tries to backpedal, ball drops between all three. Clearly a pop up in the field, but also clearly not an easily catchable ball as three fielders tried to catch it but couldn't get to the ball. Is it infield fly rule?

2) Runners on first and second with two outs. Pop up between pitcher and short. Shortstop charges and collides with runner running to third base. Both wipe out and ball drops. Is the correct call interference on the runner or fielder? The ball landed a few feet in front of the collision if that matters.

3) Runner on third. After a called strike the catcher comes up throwing to third. Batter ducks to get out of the way but catchers arm hits the batter and the ball goes into left field. Runner scores from third. Should that be batters interference and runner return to third (or be called out?) or does the runner get to score?

4) Runner on third. After a pitched ball, the catcher throws to third to try and get the runner. Ball hits the runner in the helmet in FAIR territory and goes into foul territory. Runner gets us and scores. Does he have to go back or does the run score?

5) Pitched ball hits dirt and then hits batter in the foot. Is it a dead ball and the runner awarded first base (hit by pitch) or just a ball because it hit the ground first?

6) Batted ball hits the pitcher rubber and ricochets into foul territory near home plate where the catcher picks it up. Fair or foul ball?

The rule (HS) reads that any runner is out when he runs more than 3 feet away from a direct line between bases to avoid a tag. (by interpretation, the baseline is established by the runner based on where he is presently on the field, then take a straight line to the base)

No mention of effort, no mention of another play..... The rule of thumb for umpires is "a step and a reach" by the fielder attempting to make a putout on the runner is 3 feet.

Always a judgment call by an umpire, but disappointing to hear that he interjected something into the standard that does not exist.

1) runners on first and second with no outs (infield fly rule in effect). Pop up hit between shortstop, third baseman, and pitcher. Short and third charge, pitcher tries to backpedal, ball drops between all three. Clearly a pop up in the field, but also clearly not an easily catchable ball as three fielders tried to catch it but couldn't get to the ball. Is it infield fly rule?

2) Runners on first and second with two outs. Pop up between pitcher and short. Shortstop charges and collides with runner running to third base. Both wipe out and ball drops. Is the correct call interference on the runner or fielder? The ball landed a few feet in front of the collision if that matters.

3) Runner on third. After a called strike the catcher comes up throwing to third. Batter ducks to get out of the way but catchers arm hits the batter and the ball goes into left field. Runner scores from third. Should that be batters interference and runner return to third (or be called out?) or does the runner get to score?

4) Runner on third. After a pitched ball, the catcher throws to third to try and get the runner. Ball hits the runner in the helmet in FAIR territory and goes into foul territory. Runner gets us and scores. Does he have to go back or does the run score?

5) Pitched ball hits dirt and then hits batter in the foot. Is it a dead ball and the runner awarded first base (hit by pitch) or just a ball because it hit the ground first?

6) Batted ball hits the pitcher rubber and ricochets into foul territory near home plate where the catcher picks it up. Fair or foul ball?

1) Always should be declared an infield fly. The standard for whether or not a ball could have been caught with ordinary effort does not kick in until the ball is in the outfield. Remember, the infield fly rule was written to help prevent the defense from getting a cheap out (or outs) based on the nature of the play. By not having this, the runner(s) are put in an unfair position.

2) Interference on the runner. Interference is an act which interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders, or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play........ The offensive team interferes. The defensive team obstructs. (World Series)

3) Purely a "had to be there" situation to determine if interference has occurred.. While a batter does not have freedom to do what he wants in the batters box, it's rare that a duck would be judged as a hinderance

4) Unless the runner intentionally (rules by the umpire) caused the ball to hit him, this ball is live and the run scores.

5) A pitch hitting the ground is still a pitch. The pitch does not end until the ball is secured by the catcher,, comes to rest, goes out of play, is hit by the batter (other than a foul tip) or becomes dead. The batter can swing and legally hit the ball, he can swing and miss (strike) or he can be hit by the pitch (ball is now dead) In your situation, the ball becomes dead once the pitch hits him, he is awarded first base and any runner on base must return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

1) Always should be declared an infield fly. The standard for whether or not a ball could have been caught with ordinary effort does not kick in until the ball is in the outfield. Remember, the infield fly rule was written to help prevent the defense from getting a cheap out (or outs) based on the nature of the play. By not having this, the runner(s) are put in an unfair position.

I disagree with the ordinary effort part kicking in only for fly balls that reach the outfield. That may be something an association discusses with their rules interpreter at the start of the season - in an effort to be consistent throughout the association, but NFHS Rule 2-19, under 'Definitions', states no such condition:

"An infield fly is a fair fly (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, (rule does not preclude outfielders from being allowed to attempt to make the catch) and provided the hit is made before two are out and at a time when first and second bases or all bases are occupied.

While it mentions OFs aren't precluded, there is no inference that 'ordinary effort' applies only to balls that reach the outfield.

But a good point is made - in mentioning balls hit to the outfield. One of the biggest misconceptions, IMHO, about the Infield Fly rule is the notion/myth that it can't apply to a ball hit to the outfield. I can't tell you how many times I've had to explain to coaches that the rule simply doesn't mention territory - only the infielder's ability to catch it with 'ordinary effort'. If the fly is high enough and the Infielder talented enough, the ball can easily travel 10-15 ft (or more) into the outfield and still be caught with 'ordinary effort' by an infielder - the critical criteria for an infield fly ruling.

The rule (HS) reads that any runner is out when he runs more than 3 feet away from a direct line between bases to avoid a tag. (by interpretation, the baseline is established by the runner based on where he is presently on the field, then take a straight line to the base)

No mention of effort, no mention of another play..... The rule of thumb for umpires is "a step and a reach" by the fielder attempting to make a putout on the runner is 3 feet.

Always a judgment call by an umpire, but disappointing to hear that he interjected something into the standard that does not exist.

Agree completely.

FWIW - NFHS Rule 8-4-2:

"ART. 2 . . . Any runner is out when he:
a. runs more than three feet away from a direct line between bases to avoid being tagged or to hinder a fielder while the runner is advancing or returning to a base;
1. This is not an infraction if a fielder attempting to field a batted ball is in the runner’s proper path and if the runner runs behind the fielder to
avoid interfering with him.
2. When a play is being made on a runner or batter-runner, he establishes his baseline as directly between his position and the base toward which he is moving."

On the interference/obstruction rule. I always though that if the fielder was IN THE ACT of fielding and contact occurred it was interference on the runner but if the fielder was moving to the ball but not in the actual process of fielding than that was obstruction by the fielder, not the runner. Is that wrong? If I am wrong then is it true that there could never be obstruction by the fielder as long as he is pursuing a batted ball and not simply standing in the way or moving to catch a thrown ball from another fielder?

On the interference/obstruction rule. I always though that if the fielder was IN THE ACT of fielding and contact occurred it was interference on the runner but if the fielder was moving to the ball but not in the actual process of fielding than that was obstruction by the fielder, not the runner. Is that wrong? If I am wrong then is it true that there could never be obstruction by the fielder as long as he is pursuing a batted ball and not simply standing in the way or moving to catch a thrown ball from another fielder?

That's a great question - and it's also a subsection of 8-4-2.

Here's the rule - A runner is out when he:

g. intentionally interferes with a throw or a thrown ball; or he hinders a fielder on his initial attempt to field a batted ball.

There's a whole host of other issues addressed in this subsection, but this is the wording, I believe, that speaks to your question.

Two things. First - notice the word 'contact' does not appear in the rule - only 'hinders (an) attempt'. Second, the 'act of fielding' isn't defined or mentioned.

It's a judgment call. I believe most officials will view moving toward the ball as an 'attempt to field'. FWIW - I look for any disruption of the fielder's normal stride/movement toward the ball as interference, regardless of whether or not contact occurs. The rule doesn't require contact to occur.

Regarding obstruction - interference supersedes obstruction, by rule. I'd probably only call obstruction if the fielder faked an attempt on a ball nowhere near him - in an obvious attempt to 'draw' a bogus interference call or, like you say, mindlessly gets in the way of a runner. I suppose there other ways for obstruction to occur, but one would have to see it to call it...ie - the cutoff man runs into the path of a runner rounding 1B, etc.

BTW - full disclosure...I am NOT Yappi's designated answer guy. I am a rules interpreter for an ASA assn, and also do a lot of Varsity BB in a few OHSAA HS conferences. Just trying to help out - this stuff is a passion of mine. Hope y'all don't mind.

I disagree with the ordinary effort part kicking in only for fly balls that reach the outfield. That may be something an association discusses with their rules interpreter at the start of the season - in an effort to be consistent throughout the association, but NFHS Rule 2-19, under 'Definitions', states no such condition:

"An infield fly is a fair fly (not including a line drive nor an attempted bunt) which can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, (rule does not preclude outfielders from being allowed to attempt to make the catch) and provided the hit is made before two are out and at a time when first and second bases or all bases are occupied.

While it mentions OFs aren't precluded, there is no inference that 'ordinary effort' applies only to balls that reach the outfield.

But a good point is made - in mentioning balls hit to the outfield. One of the biggest misconceptions, IMHO, about the Infield Fly rule is the notion/myth that it can't apply to a ball hit to the outfield. I can't tell you how many times I've had to explain to coaches that the rule simply doesn't mention territory - only the infielder's ability to catch it with 'ordinary effort'. If the fly is high enough and the Infielder talented enough, the ball can easily travel 10-15 ft (or more) into the outfield and still be caught with 'ordinary effort' by an infielder - the critical criteria for an infield fly ruling.

Remember, the whole purpose of the infield fly rule is to protect the offense. On a ball in the air in the infield, you don't want to open a can of worms as to what is ordinary and what is not.

As the old adage goes.... "don't be a plumber, because when they digging deep for something, rarely what they come up with looks or smells good."

BTW - full disclosure...I am NOT Yappi's designated answer guy. I am a rules interpreter for an ASA assn, and also do a lot of Varsity BB in a few OHSAA HS conferences. Just trying to help out - this stuff is a passion of mine. Hope y'all don't mind.

I invite any fellow arbiter to chime in. However, we have to be on point if we are putting rulings out there.

Cutting and pasting (not saying you are doing this) rules is not a sure-fire way to answer rules questions. There are countless interpretations that are not published in the rule book or case book that clarify rules in any sport.

Remember, the whole purpose of the infield fly rule is to protect the offense. On a ball in the air in the infield, you don't want to open a can of worms as to what is ordinary and what is not.

I can understand the logic of that - but I've never been a part of an association that calls EVERY fly ball to the infield an 'infield fly' without giving any regard to effort. There's a lot of real estate in a 90-ft square diamond - and most infielders are playing behind the baseline in many circumstances. A lazy fly ball, hit to no man's land as described in the scenario, can require an extraordinary effort to be caught, simply because it's not in the air long enough for anyone to reasonably get to it. The scenario described two infielders charging.

I'll politely agree to disagree. I don't think the offense automatically gets a free pass on this, without regard to infielder's effort. I look at the rules fairly literally, and until the ordinary effort wording is removed from the rule, I can't justify imposing the Infield Fly rule on every fly ball to the infield automatically. It'd be easier, tho, no doubt.

I invite any fellow arbiter to chime in. However, we have to be on point if we are putting rulings out there.

Cutting and pasting (not saying you are doing this) rules is not a sure-fire way to answer rules questions. There are countless interpretations that are not published in the rule book or case book that clarify rules in any sport.

I cut and paste straight from the NFHS 2013 rule book - but only as support/facts for the commentary I make.

I invite any fellow arbiter to chime in. However, we have to be on point if we are putting rulings out there.

Agreed. But I think you have to be careful - in that Yappi isn't an official OHSAA/NFHS rules interpretation source. Every interpretive answer here would have to be viewed as being the personal 'opinion' of the respective commenter. I'd think only the OHSAA UIC can really answer a question with absolute statewide authority, in terms of a specific interpretation.

Well, I don't think anyone participating on this blog believes it to be the official opinion of OHSAA! Fact of the matter is that the umpires can call what they want and if a coach is educated and savvy enough can either get it reversed or can appeal the decision if it is a Non-judgment call.

Well, I don't think anyone participating on this blog believes it to be the official opinion of OHSAA! Fact of the matter is that the umpires can call what they want and if a coach is educated and savvy enough can either get it reversed or can appeal the decision if it is a Non-judgment call.

Geez - I'd hope so. But you know the adage - if it's on the internet, it must be true! LOL

Not sure what you mean by 'appeal' - but FYI protests are not allowed in OHSAA baseball. Not even for rules interpretations.

I agree with your comment about a coach being savvy to the rules. It's the main reason I try not to stray from being literal about them. If the official knows the rules by rote as much as possible, he/she then has at least a better-than-fair chance to answer the coach's questions as to what they saw and why they ruled the way they did. A really knowledgeable coach can instantly jump on a discrepancy. I would, if I were in their shoes.

I can understand the logic of that - but I've never been a part of an association that calls EVERY fly ball to the infield an 'infield fly' without giving any regard to effort. There's a lot of real estate in a 90-ft square diamond - and most infielders are playing behind the baseline in many circumstances. A lazy fly ball, hit to no man's land as described in the scenario, can require an extraordinary effort to be caught, simply because it's not in the air long enough for anyone to reasonably get to it. The scenario described two infielders charging.

I'll politely agree to disagree. I don't think the offense automatically gets a free pass on this, without regard to infielder's effort. I look at the rules fairly literally, and until the ordinary effort wording is removed from the rule, I can't justify imposing the Infield Fly rule on every fly ball to the infield automatically. It'd be easier, tho, no doubt.

This is more of an official score/stat question. Does anyone know the proper way to keep strike to ball ratio or strike percentage for pitchers?

For example: 1st 2 pitches are strikes. Count 0-2.
Next 2 pitches are balls. 2-2.
Then the batter fouls off 5 pitches on a row. Count remains 2-2.
Would it be correct to say the ball to strike ratio is 2:2 and the strike percentage is 50%, at this point for the pitcher?
Next question:
Next pitch is a ground ball 6-3 out. Is that pitch counted as a strike, ball, or nothing and the above stats remain?
Pitchers always like to know their totals for the game/season, so any insight on the correct way would be appreciated.

This is more of an official score/stat question. Does anyone know the proper way to keep strike to ball ratio or strike percentage for pitchers?

For example: 1st 2 pitches are strikes. Count 0-2.
Next 2 pitches are balls. 2-2.
Then the batter fouls off 5 pitches on a row. Count remains 2-2.
Would it be correct to say the ball to strike ratio is 2:2 and the strike percentage is 50%, at this point for the pitcher?
Next question:
Next pitch is a ground ball 6-3 out. Is that pitch counted as a strike, ball, or nothing and the above stats remain?
Pitchers always like to know their totals for the game/season, so any insight on the correct way would be appreciated.

the way it is done is to count the number of pitches, subtract the number of pitches called "ball' and the rest are strikes.

even if the pitch went over everybody's head and the batter swung at it, it is a strike, right? a pitch up in the batter's eyes..... the kid tomahawks it and hits it over the fence is a strike.

the stat is of limited utility. in reality, only the pitcher or catcher knows (thinks he knows) whether any particular pitch was in the "strike zone" which is a subjective judgement call, in the first place. some pitches the pitcher knows are balls, are called strikes, and other pitches the pitcher knows are in the strike zone, are called balls.

so the only way to calculate it: total pitches minus balls equals strikes.

As far as the infield fly rule only one thing really applies here. Did the umpire call it "infield fly" !! If he did it is if he did not it is not.
I was upming a LL state tourney game and had close to this same play. REMEMBER 60' bases w/small infield runners on 1st and 2nd no outs.
batter hits a blooper between pitch an short. I start to call inf. fly but only say INFIELD because I realize its going to be a harder play than i first thought. Ball hits ground infront of SS who stopped running. SS picks it up and throws to third for a "force out" as both runners take off when ball hits ground.
Batting teams coach comes walking out and says very calmly "if you called Infield fly that should not have been a force play , they had to tag him"
I told him you are right but I never finished the call. which I screwed up it was not fair to defense to think they had a force OR to put runners in jeapordy .
So he is what we are going to do. NO MATTER WHAT you are having runners on 1st & 2nd w/ 1 out. (coach on 3rd would never have called runner over IF he thought IN Fly was called) Now do you want batter out put other 2 back on bases or do you want batter safe and runner who was on 2nd to start the play called out.
He thought for a second and said OK lets let the play stand as is.
I screwed up the call and this was I thoiught the fairest ruling.
Both managers handled it great I give them credit for understanding

As far as the infield fly rule only one thing really applies here. Did the umpire call it "infield fly" !! If he did it is if he did not it is not.

Not true under High School rules.

Understanding that the IFF rule is to prevent the defense from getting one, two, or potentially three cheap outs, the declaration of "infield fly batter is out (if fair)" is for the benefit of the runners.

If the umpire does not declare the infield fly when he should have, the rule is still in force and the batter is out.

Home team at bat, bases are loaded no outs
Batter hits a ground ball to third base
Fielder throws home. First out
Catcher takes 1 ro 2 steps up first base line
Runner from third base runs in front of catcher
Catcher double clutches then throws to first
Runner at first is call safe.

As far as the infield fly rule only one thing really applies here. Did the umpire call it "infield fly" !! If he did it is if he did not it is not.
which I screwed up it was not fair to defense to think they had a force OR to put runners in jeapordy .
So he is what we are going to do. NO MATTER WHAT you are having runners on 1st & 2nd w/ 1 out. (coach on 3rd would never have called runner over IF he thought IN Fly was called) Now do you want batter out put other 2 back on bases or do you want batter safe and runner who was on 2nd to start the play called out.

Not true in LL Rules either.
Remember, the rule is designed to protect the base runners, not the defense, regardless of whether or not you messed up the Infield Fly call. If this was an infield fly situation, then in your case, the runners would have been at 2nd and 3rd at the end of the play, not at 1st and 2nd as you stated. Batter is out, both runners advanced at their own risk, runner advancing to 3rd was not tagged, so he is safe at 3rd. Don't ever assume what a coach will or won't do. Also, LL runners tend to run even when their coach is telling them to stay.

Home team at bat, bases are loaded no outs
Batter hits a ground ball to third base
Fielder throws home. First out
Catcher takes 1 ro 2 steps up first base line
Runner from third base runs in front of catcher
Catcher double clutches then throws to first
Runner at first is call safe.

R3 is out on the force at home. If the umpire deems that R3 then interferes with F2's throw to 1B in an attempt to break up a double play, the ball is immediately dead and the Batter-Runner is also called out. See rule 7.09 (d) below:

7.09 It is interference by a batter or runner when-
(d) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate;
Rule 7.09(d) Comment: If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders.

Last edited by SteelerNation; 01-02-14 at 01:42 AM.
Reason: answer showed up twice? Some of it cut.

R3 is out on the force at home. If the umpire deems that R3 then interferes with F2's throw to 1B in an attempt to break up a double play, the ball is immediately dead and the Batter-Runner is also called out. See rule 7.09 (d) below:

7.09 It is interference by a batter or runner when-
(d) Any batter or runner who has just been put out hinders or impedes any following play being made on a runner. Such runner shall be declared out for the interference of his teammate;
Rule 7.09(d) Comment: If the batter or a runner continues to advance after he has been put out, he shall not by that act alone be considered as confusing, hindering or impeding the fielders.

Based on the play as described, you have an out at the plate and interference by a retired runner.

Batter runner is declared out for the interference by the retired runner against the catcher. Because this was a part of a force play, by rule the runners are returned to the bases occupied at the time of the pitch.